Investigating the use of speaking tasks in English classes at Le Quy Don gifted high school in Nha Trang

INVESTIGATING THE USE OF SPEAKING TASKS
IN ENGLISH CLASSES AT LE QUY DON
GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL IN NHA TRANG
DOAN TON BAO PHUC
University of Foreign Languages, Hue University
E-mail:
Abstract: The current study investigates the types of speaking tasks used in
grade 11 classes at Le Quy Don Gifted High School. The data of research
were collected by means of classroom observations, questionnaires and
interviews. The teachers’ use of tasks was documented through classroom
observations and their difficulties in tasks implementation were explored
through questionnaires and interviews. The data were analyzed
quantitatively and qualitatively. The overall findings show that the
commonly used tasks are ‘ask and answer questions’, ‘work in pairs to make
a dialogue’, ‘talk about personal experiences’, and ‘arrange information’.
Additionally, the teachers reported large class sizes, students’ low
confidence, students’ mixed proficiency level as major obstacles in their task
implementation..
Keywords: Tasks, speaking skills.

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
A considerable body of research has focused on how task design or manipulating task
characteristics influences language learning (Adams & Ross-Feldman, 2008; Bygate,
2016; García Mayo &Azkarai, 2016; Kuiken & Vedder, 2012; Robinson, 2011).
However, how teachers use tasks in their actual classrooms and what task types they use
has largely been neglected. Nguyen, Newton and Crabbe (2018) explore how teachers
used textbook tasks in EFL classrooms, but do not address students’ perspective. Jeon
and Hahn (2006) carried out research on task-based language teaching (TBLT) at a
Korean secondary school. The results indicated that TBLT positively affected students’
speaking ability. Nevertheless, there is little research into classroom use of speaking
tasks in high school in Vietnam from both teacher and student perspectives. Bui (2017)

conducted the research to investigate teachers’ difficulties perceived in conducting
TBLT at University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS) in Hanoi. Although
these studies provide useful insights in teaching speaking through TBLT, there is still a
gap for the investigation into speaking task types. The current study contributes to
understanding tasks with a classroom focus by investigating task types used in English
speaking classes at a high school in Vietnam.
Teaching English in Vietnam is greatly affected by examination-oriented practice and
the curriculum highlights the theoretical information and does not provide students with
Journal of Science, Hue University of Education
ISSN 1859-1612, No. 02(50)/2019: pp. 15-24
Received: 12/11/2018; Revised: 15/11/2018; Accepted: 19/11/2018


16

DOAN TON BAO PHUC

adequate space for hands-on experience (Canh, 2011; Nguyen, 2014). Therefore, this
study investigated the use of speaking tasks employed in the grade 11 classes at Le Quy
Don Gifted High School for the purpose of exploring teachers’ current practice of
speaking tasks as well as their difficulties in task implementation. The present study is
of great value to understanding speaking task types in use in from teachers’
perspectives. English teachers in Vietnam could benefit from this study by using
alternative task types to teach their students speaking. The findings can be useful for
English teachers at junior high school level or even primary level for the purpose of
improving the learning environment as well as students’ speaking ability.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Task-based language teaching (TBLT)
Task-based language teaching pertains to teaching a second or foreign language that
helps engage learners in authentic language use by performing a series of tasks (Bygate,

2016; Long, 2015).
2.2. Task definitions
There are a great number of task definitions proposed by well-known authors (Bygate,
Skehan & Swain, 2001; Long & Crooks, 1992; Ellis, 2003, 2009; Skehan, 1998; Willis
& Willis, 2007). Common in these task definitions are a focus on meaning rather than
language form (i.e, expressing meaning), a clear outcome and reflection of real world
activities. Ellis (2009) clearly specifies that learners can use whatever language
resources they have in order to achieve the outcome of the task. While some scholars
(e.g., Long & Crooks, 1992; Long, 2015) give greater emphasis on the real world
aspects of tasks as authenticity, Ellis (2003) holds that a task should involve processes
of language use similar to processes involved in doing real world tasks. According to
Ellis (2003), there are two forms of task authenticity, namely situational authenticity
and interactional authenticity. The former refers to replication of real world tasks and
the latter the processes involved that assist language acquisistion in doing tasks.
2.3. Task types
Three key task taxonomies relevant to the present study include Willis’s (1996),
Nunan’s (2001) and Ellis’s (2003). Willis (1996) taxonomises tasks based on cognitive
processes involved such as listing, ordering, comparing, problem solving, sharing
personal experiences and creative tasks. In Nunan’s (2001) categorisation of tasks, there
are pedagogic tasks and real-world tasks. In this way, pedagogic tasks correspond to
tasks with situational authenticity as Ellis (2003) describes above.
2.4. Oral tasks
A group of researchers and language educators suggest different types of oral tasks and
name them more or less based on task genres. This categorisation of tasks are more
teacher-friendly and can act as a guide for teachers to use in the classroom. Bailey
(2005), Harmer (2012) and Kayi (2006) suggest a number of speaking tasks that can be


INVESTIGATING THE USE OF SPEAKING TASKS IN ENGLISH CLASSES…

17

used in the classroom, namely conversations, guided conversations, interviews,
information gap and jigsaw activities, scripted dialogues, drama, role-playing, picturebased activities. Meanwhile, Morozova (2013) further add tasks that involve students
giving their thoughts on topics assigned by teachers; listening to classmates’ thoughts
and responding, presenting in groups on a completed project, describing pictures or
doing dramatic monologues
2.5. Teaching speaking
Speaking is considered as the most difficult skill among the four language skills
(listening, speaking, reading and writing). According to Brown (2001), speaking is an
interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving and
processing information. The target of teaching speaking skills is communicative
efficiency.
2.6. Teachers’ difficulties in tasks implementation
A number of studies have investigated teachers’ perceived challenges when carrying out
tasks in the classroom. Bui (2017), for example, investigated the teachers’ perceptions
of difficulties in the implementation of tasks at University of Languages and
International Studies (ULIS) in Hanoi, Vietnam. The researcher divided the difficulties
in task implementation into two categories, namely internal and external factors.
Specifically, internal factors include interference of exam-oriented teaching method and
students’ mixed proficiency level, while external factors comprise inadequate teaching
hours, students’ unfamiliarity with task-based teaching, students’ insufficient of
vocabulary and background knowledge, teachers’ misconception of “task” and task
design and teachers’ lack of constant real-life use of target language.
Among the factors as shown, the two biggest obstacles teachers identified were limited
teaching hours and exam-oriented pedagogical method. Similarly, in Mustafa’s (2013)
study, crowded classes, inadequate time, lack of technical facilities and students’ mixed
proficiency levels are major difficulties. Chang and Goswami (2011) conducted a study
to investigate factors that hamper the implementation of tasks in Taiwanese Colleges.
The teachers in this study indicated some factors that hinder their implementation such

as teachers’ lack of enough knowledge and skills about oral teaching and its
implementation, and insufficient teacher training. These difficulties and those above are
also reported in many other studies (Adam & Newton, 2009; Carless, 2011; Hu, 2002;
Li, 1998, 2001, 2003; Littlewood, 2007; Ng & Tang, 1997; Shaoqian & Jiaxin, 2016;
Zhang, 2007).
3. RESEARCH DESIGN
3.1. Research questions
The present study investigated the use of speaking task types and teachers’ difficulties
in task implementation. Therefore, the following research questions were put forward:
RQ1: What are teachers’ reported frequency of use of different speaking task types?


18

DOAN TON BAO PHUC

RQ2: What are teachers’ difficulties in task implementation?
3.2. Participants
There were three 12 participating teachers in this study including one four males and
two eight females with teaching experience about 8 to 20 years. Additionally, 104 grade
11 students from three majors classes, namely Physics, Chemistry and Literature at Le
Quy Don Gifted High School participated in the research.
3.3. Data collection instruments
The data collection methods used in this study were classroom observations,
questionnaires and interviews. The researcher took 12 classroom observations in 11th
grade classes specializing Chemistry, Physics and Literature. In terms of questionnaires,
two written questionnaires were handed out to the participants in order to acquire the
data for the research. For both teacher and student questionnaire, there were close-ended
questions and open questions to allow them to write down their ideas.
4. FINDINGS

4.1. Teachers’ use of textbook tasks
It is important to note that of the 34 speaking tasks in use during 12-period classroom
observations, the majority were related to working in pairs and individuals. Specifically,
there were 10 “ask and answer” tasks that were regularly used from Unit 11 to Unit 15,
4 “making a dialogue with partners” tasks and tasks that involves students sharing
personal ideas about an issue was the next popular type with 7 speaking tasks that were
used in different topics. Besides this, there were two “discussion” tasks about ways to
save energy and seven “group presentation about a particular topic” tasks. The
remaining speaking tasks include two “interview” tasks, one “role-play” task and one
“picture description” task.
It could be seen that the majority of speaking tasks carried out during the 12-period
classroom observations are in line with features of tasks described by Ellis (2003)
among others. That is, they primarily focus on meaning to let students convey their
ideas and allow students to use whatever linguistic resources that they are having.
What’s more, these oral tasks provide linguistic input, obtain clear outcomes so as to
help students bolster their oral ability as well as self-confidence during their oral
learning progress.
4.2. The frequency of use of speaking tasks by teachers
In order to investigate the frequency of the use of various task types in teaching
speaking, questionnaires were delivered to 12 teachers to ask about the level of
frequency they employed speaking certain task types in lessons. The results are
categorized into most frequently used tasks and less frequently used tasks, and the
results for the former are presented in Figure 1 and those of the latter in Figure 2.


INVESTIGATING THE USE OF SPEAKING TASKS IN ENGLISH CLASSES…

19

Figure 1. Most frequently used tasks

90
80

83.33

83.33

75.00

75.00

75.00

70
60
50
40
30

25.00

25.00
16.67

20

25.00

16.67

10

0

0

0

0

0
Ask and answer Make a dialogue
Always

Talk about
yourself
Usually

Solve a problem

Arrange the
information

Sometimes

As the Figure 1 show four commonly used tasks in the speaking lessons, as the teachers
reported are ‘ask and answer the questions’, ‘making a dialogue based on a given
situation’, and ‘talk about yourself’ and ‘arranging information’. Specifically, 9 of 12
teachers always used “ask and answer the questions” task and 25.00% of them usually
do so, meanwhile almost all the teachers (10 of 12 teachers with roughly 83.00%) stated

that their most used oral task is to let students work in pairs to create a conversation
based on a given situation. The next commonly used oral task is information
arrangement reported by 75.00% of the teachers usually using them and 25.00% of them
reported that they occasionally conducted this type of speaking activity. Finally, the
majority of teachers (10 of 12 teachers or roughly 83.00%) said that they usually
conducted a task that allows students to talk about themselves.
As seen from Figure 2, interestingly, just only one teacher (8.33%) stated that she let
students perform a role-play based on a situation and 100% of teachers never, let
students carried out a debate. Additionally, nearly 68% of the teachers stated that they
never let students tell a story, and two out of 12 teachers (16.67%) let students conduct
an interview and report back to the class. Besides this, the percentage of giving a
presentation or letting students give a presentation of a topic of their own interest is
83.33% and 75.00% respectively. The teachers said they never conducted these oral
tasks in the speaking lessons because the thing is that they had to follow the sequence of
speaking tasks in the textbook and regulations of the school curriculum.


20

DOAN TON BAO PHUC

Figure 2. Less common speaking tasks
120

100
91.67

100

83.33

83.33
75.00

80

66.67

60

33.33

40
20

25.00
16.67

16.67
8.33
0

0
Do a
presentation

Perform a
role-play

Tell a story

Seldom

Never

Present an
interesting
topic

Have a
discussion

Conduct an
interview

Sometimes

4.3. Teachers’ difficulties in implementing speaking tasks in classrooms
Table 1. Teachers’ perceived difficulties in using tasks in speaking lesson
DIFFICULTIES
1. Crowded class
2. Students’ mixed proficiency level
3. Students’ unwillingness to speak due to low confidence
4. Students’ unwillingness to speak due to insufficient
ideas.
5. No speaking exams/ tests
6. Students do not collaborate in group work
7. Students do not have motivation to learn speaking

Teachers

(N = 12)
11
7
11
9

91.67
58.33
91.67
75.00

8
3
6

66.67
25.00
50.00

(%)

The teachers were also asked in the questionnaire what difficulties they encountered
when implementing tasks and their perceived difficulties are presented in Table 4.1. The
result shows that the greatest challenges the teachers reported are large class size
(91.67%) and students’ fear for speaking due to their lack of confidence (91.67%) and
insufficient ideas (75.00%). Only 3 teachers, or 25.00% of them supposed that students
did not work together when working in groups. Students’ disinterest in speaking
(50.00%), mixed proficiency (58.33%) and the fact that national examination that does
not have a speaking component (66.67%) are additional difficulties.

INVESTIGATING THE USE OF SPEAKING TASKS IN ENGLISH CLASSES…

21

5. DISCUSSION
Regarding the first research question, the finding is consistent with that by Nubia (2016)
who stated that students’ favourite speaking topics fall into motivating topics or topics
which constitute a challenge to be resolved. Additionally, findings from Nubia (2016)
indicate that sharing personal experience task proves an active and voluntary
involvement of students. Maley and Duff (2001) also states that drama activities might
encourage students to converse in different scenarios with natural communication and
meaningful context. It is also consistent with findings from other research (Sylvén &
Sundqvist, 2012; Thepsuriwong, 2014), which found that role-playing tasks are good
for the development of students’ vocabulary size and for the development of
conversational language.
Concerning the second research question, the findings are consistent with Li (1998),
Jarvis and Atsilarat (2004), Jeon and Hahn (2006), Nishino and Watanabe (2008) who
indicated that teachers find it hard to manage large classes, particularly when carrying
out TBLT. This can be understandable that the number of students in class ranges from
35 to 44 and it was obviously rather difficult for teachers to observe and supervise
students’ task performance in pairs or groups. Additionally, they are familiar with the
traditional lecture-oriented approach and teacher-centered classrooms. This may result
from the fact that most Vietnamese’s high school EFL teachers still employ grammartranslation which foregrounds students’ grammar learning through translation and
interpretation of rule after rule (Brown, 2001).
6. LIMITATIONS, FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS AND CONCLUSION
6.1. Limitations of the study and future research directions
The current research has several limitations. First, the study was conducted at one single
school for gifted students, with a focus on only three teachers and students from this
school. The results therefore should not be generalized to other contexts. Future

research should address a variety of teaching contexts with larger samples.
Secondly, the research was able to document students’ perceived task preferences and
these might not say much about how tasks actually engage students and their actual
challenges. Research into how students carry out certain types of tasks sill be useful to
inform textbook design, and materials selection. And task implementation in order to
enhance students’’ learning through speaking tasks.
Thirdly, the present study only focuses on speaking tasks in speaking lessons. It did not
look at how speaking tasks are used in other skills-based or language focus lessons.
Exploring oral tasks in light of these other sections of the unit is useful.
Finally, the teacher observation and questionnaire is limited, so the results should be
read with caution. Further research is clearly needed as to how important teachers
perceive of different aspects of tasks.


22

DOAN TON BAO PHUC

Even though there are a few limitations, this research greatly contributes to the study of
TBLT. First, it is a hands-on investigation of the actual practice of teaching speaking
through tasks in the high-school context, thereby contributing to the literature in this
area. Second, this study is necessarily vital for the professional development and
training of English language teachers because as it exposes the differences between the
teachers' perceptions and practices. Some factors that contributed to such differences
were actually beyond the teachers' control, e.g., students' learning needs and the
washback effect from public examinations, etc. Both students and teachers in this study
exposed their interest for tasks which will pave a way for further studies of
implementation strategies in the future.
6.2. Conclusion
The study investigated types of speaking tasks employed in a high-school context and it

is hoped that it contributes to our understanding of speaking tasks from both teacher and
student perspectives. It adds to our understanding of the ways teachers use tasks and a
wide range of tasks reported being used and preferred, which further informs task
design, task implementation to engage students. It provides insights into further
professional development for teachers to use a more student-centered, real life-related
and communication-oriented teaching approach in not only Le Quy Don Gifted High
School but also in other high schools across Vietnam and other EFL contexts.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]
[3]

[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

Adams, R., & Feldman, L. (2008). Does writing influence learner attention to form? In
D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Eds.), The oral-literate connection: Perspectives on L2
speaking, writing and other media interactions (pp. 243-265). Ann Arbor, MI: The
University of Michigan Press.
Adam, R., & Newton, J. (2009). TBLT in Asia: Constraints and opportunities. Asian
Journal of English Language Teaching, 19, 1-17.
Ahn, K., (2011). Learning to teach under curriculum reform: The practicum experience
in South Korea. In K. E. Johnson, K.E. & P. Golombek (Eds), Research on second
language teacher education, pp. 239-253. New York: Routledge.
Bailey, K. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching: Speaking. New York:

McGraw Hill.
Bui, H. T. (2017). Difficulties in implementing task-based language teaching perceived
by ISP teachers.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles. An interactive approach to language
pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice Hall.
Bygate, M., P. Skehan, & M. Swain (eds.). (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks,
Second language learning, teaching and testing. Harlow: Longman
Bygate, M. (2016). Sources, developments and directions of task-based language
teaching. The Language Learning Journal, 44(4), 381-400.
Canh, L.V., & Barnard, R. (2009). Curricular innovation behind closed classroom
doors: A Vietnam case study. Prospect, 24(2), 20-33.


INVESTIGATING THE USE OF SPEAKING TASKS IN ENGLISH CLASSES…

23

[10] Chang, M. and Goswami, J. S. (2011). Factors affecting the implementation of
communicative language teaching in Taiwanese College English classes. English
Language Teaching, 4 (2).
[11] Carless, D. (2011). From testing to productive student learning: Implementing
formative assessment in Confucian-heritage settings. New York, NY: Routledge.
[12] Ellis, R. (2003) . Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: OUP.
[13] García Mayo, M. P., & Azkarai, A. (2016). EFL task-based interaction: Does task
modality impact on language-related episodes? . In M. Sato & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer
interaction and second Language learning. Pedagogical potential and research agenda,
241-266.
[14] Ghatage, M. M. (2009). Introduction of English from grade 1 in Maharashtra, India. In
J. Enever, J. Moon & U. Raman (Eds), Young learner English language policy and
implementation: International perspectives (pp. 45-51). Reading: Garnet Education.

[15] Jarvis, H., & Atsilarat, S. (2004). Shifting paradigms: From a communicative to a
context-based approach. English Language Teaching Journal, 50(1), 9-15.
[16] Jeon, I. J. & Hahn, J. W. (2006). ‘Exploring EFL Teachers? Perceptions of Task-Based
Language Teaching: A Case Study of Korean Secondary School Classroom Practice’.
Asian EFL Journal, 8, 123 – 139.
[17] Ho, W. K. (2003). English language teaching in Asia today: An overview. In W. K.
Ho& R.Y. L. Wong (Eds), English language teaching in East Asia today: Changing
policies and practices (pp. 1-32). Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.
[18] Hu, G. (2002). Recent important developments in secondary English-language teaching
in the People’s Republic of China. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 15, 30-49.
[19] Ismi, A. (2016). An analysis of students’ difficulties in speaking English: A case study
at eleventh grade students of MA AL. A master’s thesis, University of Mataram.
[20] Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching speaking: activities to promote speaking in a second
language. The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. XII, No. 11, November 2006 Retrieved from
on October 20, 2015.
[21] Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Speaking and writing tasks and their effects on second
language performance. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of
second language acquisition (pp. 364-377). London: Routledge.
[22] Kuchah, K. (2009). Early bilingualism in Cameroon: Where politics and education
meet. In J. Enever, J. Moon & U. Raman (Eds), Young learner English language policy
and implementation: International perspectives (pp. 87-94). Reading: Garnet
Education.
[23] Li, C. (2003). A study of in-service teachers’ beliefs, difficulties and problems in
current teacher development programs. HKBU Papers in Applied Language Studies, 7,
64-85.
[24] Li, D. F. (2001). Teachers’ perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative
approach in South Korea. In D. R. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds), Innovation in English
language teaching (pp. 149-166). London & New York: Macquarie University and The
Open University.
[25] Li, D. F. (1998). It’s always more difficult than you plan and imagine. Teachers’

[26] perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in
[27] South Korea. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 677-703.
[28] Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian
classrooms. Language Teaching, 40, 243-249.


24

DOAN TON BAO PHUC

[29] Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching.
Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
[30] Maley, A., & Duff, A. (2001). Drama techniques in language learning: A resource book
for communication activities for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
[31] Morozova, Y. (2013). Methods of enhancing speaking skills of elementary level
students. Tranlation Journal, 17 (1).
[32] Nguyen. B. T., Newton, J. & Crabble, D. (2018). Teacher transformation of textbook
tasks in Vietnamese EFL high school classrooms. In Bygate, M., Samuda, V. & K. Van
Den Branden (Eds.), TBLT as a researched pedagogy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[33] Ng, C., & Tang, E. (1997). Teachers’ needs n the process of EFL reform in China: A
report from Shanghai, Perspective, 9, 63-85.
[34] Nishino, T., & Watanabe, M. (2008). Communication‐oriented policies versus
classroom realities in Japan. Tesol Quarterly, 42(1), 133-138.
[35] Nubia, P. (2016). Effects of tasks on spoken interaction and motivation in English
language learners. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, 13, 34-55.
[36] Shamim, F. (2012).Teaching large classes. In Burns, A., & Richards, J. C. (Eds.), The
Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching (pp. 95-102).
New York: CUP.
[37] Sylvén, L. K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and

L2 proficiency among young learners. ReCALL, 24(3), 302-321.
[38] Thepsuriwong, W. (2004). The use of dramatic activities for english speaking ability of
fifth grade students at santithamwittayakhom school in yasothorn province. A master’s
thesis, University of SinakharinwirotPrasanmit, Thailand.
[39] Wedgwood, R. (2007). Education and poverty reduction in Tanzania. International
Journal of Educational Development, 27, 383-396.
[40] Willis, D. & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
[41] Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.
[42] Zhang, Y. (2007). TBLT innovation in primary school English language teaching in
mainland China. In K. Van den Branden, K. Van Gorp & M. Verhelst (Eds), Tasks in
action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective (pp. 6891). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.